Re: Why only crap in this NG? (was Wolter claims ...)

Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@xxxxxxxxx> says in
news:t7ef91dm7ac6h96p9i24c7utqed9carf5e@xxxxxxx:

> On Fri, 27 May 2005 09:44:12 -0600, "Tedd Jacobs"
> <Jacobs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Eric Stevens" wrote...
>>
>>leave it to eric...
>>
>>
> Would you rather it was Philip? :-)
>
> I did look before I responded. As far as I can tell, the only
> article by Paul Burke in which he starts a new thread is the one
> in which he complains about the range of topics presently under
> discussion. This is not an uncommon phenomenon and the cure may
> be partly in his own hands.

His point is that you always take exception with what might be, when
it is obvious that we are arguing about what will never be. Your not
under attack here Eric, you actually know where to find solid ground
if you so choose. Although frequently you choose not to :^).

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why only crap in this NG? (was Wolter claims ...)
    ... >>> article by Paul Burke in which he starts a new thread is the ... >>when it is obvious that we are arguing about what will never be. ... >>Your not under attack here Eric, you actually know where to find ... >>solid ground if you so choose. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Why only crap in this NG? (was Wolter claims ...)
    ... >it is obvious that we are arguing about what will never be. ... >under attack here Eric, you actually know where to find solid ground ... Eric Stevens ...
    (sci.archaeology)